This paper aims to reveal the conceptualization and opportunity of the concept of the cyber notary as one of the other notary authorities as stated in the explanation of Article 15 Section (3) of Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning Position of Notary Public (UUJN). This paper is a normative study using the statute approach and conceptual approach. The concept of a cyber notary can be interpreted as a method for a notary in carrying out their duties and authorities by using electronic equipment (cyber), but their authority has limitations for the authority of certification of transactions conducted electronically. Opportunities for the concept of a cyber notary can be reviewed in the drafting of the results of the General Meeting of Shareholders based on Article 77 of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies and storage of the Notary protocol in electronic form. The application of cyber notary is still constrained by UUJN which has not yet opened up opportunities for deed making through electronic media.

This study discussed the Balinese customary law regarding the position and inheritance rights of natural children who were adopted by their grander. This study used an empirical legal study, which was a method of legal study that sought to see and examine the law can work in people’s lives. The results of the study showed that the adoption of a natural child by his grandfather was legal according to Balinese customary law, the position of a natural child adopted by his grandfather was the same as his biological child. State law only had a role to strengthen the prevailing customary law. The right to inherit natural children who were adopted by their grandfathers were the same as biological children, including the inheritance of their rights and obligations both as a child and as a member of an indigenous village community.

This paper aim to analyze the legal implications of legal conflicts between Article 126 paragraph 1 and paragraph 3 of UUPT.Article 126 paragraph (1) of Law no. 40 of 2007 regarding Limited Liability Company (UUPT) states that the acquisition process should consider the interests of minority shareholders. But in article 126 paragraph (3) UUPT that the business undertaken by minority shareholders under Article 62 UUPT does not stop the acquisition process. It appears that the UUPT has not yet provided legal protection for minority shareholders and there is a legal conflict between Article 126 paragraph (1) of the Company Law which wishes to provide legal protection to minority shareholders and paragraph (3) of the article which illustrates that the shareholders' Minorities do not stop the acquisition process. By approach of legislation and case approach, the result is that there is no legal certainty over legal efforts by minority shareholders in using the voting rights in accordance with the shares they hold when the minority shareholders do not approve the acquisition. UUPT has not provided clear legal protection for minority shareholders so that in the process of acquisition of minority shareholders is impaired.

The final and binding nature of international arbitral awards results in the nullification of the rights of the parties to file legal remedies against the arbitral award, as is the case with decisions of national courts that can be appealed, appealed, or reviewed. However, Article 68 paragraph (2) of Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution provides an opportunity for parties who refuse to recognize and implement an international arbitral award that can be appealed to, as well as Article 70 must also be explained that Article this applies only to national arbitrations. This of course creates legal uncertainty, disuse, and injustice for the parties. Therefore, what is highlighted in this research is what is the position of the final and binding international arbitration award in Indonesia. The research method used in this article is legal research using primary and secondary legal materials. The results of the research show that the position of international arbitral awards in Indonesia is not the same as the decisions of national courts because they cannot be appealed, cassated, and reviewed. Therefore, it is necessary to completely amend international arbitration arrangements by removing Article 68 paragraph (2) of Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution in order to provide legal certainty, benefit, and justice for the parties.

The Job Creation Law passed and enacted in 2020 is a momentual result with the expectation that the Law will create jobs. But after the passage of the Job Creation Law with the use of the omnibus law method, it produced various responses and reactions from the community so that the community also among academics produced pros and cons to the Law. In addition, after the Uncang-Cipta Kerja Law was passed, it has had an impact on the elimination of industries included in the negative investment list, triggering an increase in foreign investment in Indonesia. Based on the description, a problem was formulated: what is the legal politics behind the change in licensing norms and the investment climate in the Job Creation Law using the omnibus law method. The research method used in the writing of this article is the use of legal normative research. The source of legal materials used includes 3 (three) types of legal materials, namely primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. Legal data collection techniques use a literature research model that analyzes the legal data studied in the form of qualitative and descriptive content analysis. The results showed that the government’s efforts to reduce duplication of regulations through comprehensive legislation are expected to accelerate licensing.Keywords: Omnibus Law; UU Cipta Kerja; Licensing; Investment. AbstrakUndang-Undang Cipta Kerja yang disahkan dan diundangkan pada tahun 2020 merupakan suatu hasil momentual dengan harapan dari Undang-Undang tersebut ialah menciptakan lapangan kerja. Tetapi pasca pengesahan Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja dengan penggunaan metode omnibus law tersebut menghasilkan berbagai tanggapan dan reaksi dari lapisan masyarakat sehingga masyarakat pun juga dikalangan akademisi menghasilkan pro kontra terhadap Undang-undang tersebut. Selain itu, pasca Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja disahkan telah berdampak pada penghapusan industri yang masuk dalam daftar negatif investasi sehingga memicu peningkatan investasi asing di Indonesia. Berdasarkan uraian tersebut, dirumuskan masalah: apa politik hukum dibalik perubahan norma perizinan dan iklim investasi dalam UU Cipta kerja menggunakan metode omnibus law. Metode penelitian yang dipakai pada penulisan artikel ini ialah penggunaan penelitian normatif hukum. Sumber bahan hukum yang digunakan meliputi 3 (tiga) jenis bahan hukum, yakni materi hukum primer, materi hukum sekunder, serta materi hukum tersier. Teknik pengumpulan data hukum menggunakan model penelitian kepustakaan yang menganalisis data hukum yang diteliti berupa analisis isi kualitatif dan deskriptif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa upaya pemerintah untuk mengurangi duplikasi regulasi melalui undang-undang yang komprehensif diharapkan dapat mempercepat perizinan.Kata Kunci: Omnibus Law; UU Cipta Kerja; Perizinan; Investasi.